Governor of Maryland married his deputy chief of staff;

January 29, 2002 8:33 PM

Governor of Maryland married his deputy chief of staff; she resigned (effected immediately) from her $103,588 position on Friday, the day the couple were married. I'm sure boss/subordinate relationships go on all the time, but isn't it a problem when the boss is the governor of a state? I'm not one to focus on the personal lives of politicians, but this does raise my eyebrows. What do you think -- should state employees be subject to a dating policy simply because they work in the government? Or is this no big deal?
posted by jennak (26 comments total)

No big deal, IMHO. The fact that she resigned on the day they were married, to my mind, speaks well of them.
posted by aramaic at 8:35 PM on January 29, 2002

...although I probably would have preferred it if he were the one to resign.
posted by aramaic at 8:35 PM on January 29, 2002

I'm also troubled by the following quote: "When their relationship became more than professional, her influence in the administration increased, with lobbyists and state officials saying she had great power but few willing to speak on the record about her for fearing of raising Glendening's ire." It troubles me because either gov't staff were afraid of her, or it means the WP is reading into things that aren't there.

Despite my concern, another part of me also thinks that this isn't such a big deal -- heads of government can pick their inner staff for whatever reason they want. Kennedy's brother was attorney general. So what's the big deal if his girlfriend (or wife) is his deputy chief?
posted by jennak at 8:38 PM on January 29, 2002

In that picture, she looks like his daughter or something.

Hey, lotsa luck Pops.
posted by BarneyFifesBullet at 8:50 PM on January 29, 2002

I don't think it is a big deal either, and it seems to be more common these days.

It troubles me because either gov't staff were afraid of her
I consider a scared goverment staff a huge bonus.
posted by thirteen at 8:56 PM on January 29, 2002

No big deal. We have bigger fish to fry.
posted by hitsman at 8:56 PM on January 29, 2002

In that picture, he looks like Barry Bostwick.
posted by thebigpoop at 9:00 PM on January 29, 2002

No big deal. Better to have no policy than to have one that is just going to be ingnored by most people.
posted by peterbaer at 9:06 PM on January 29, 2002

There has been a rumor that one of the drawbacks to Viagra is that it clouds your vision.
posted by Mack Twain at 9:23 PM on January 29, 2002

isn't that sort of scandalous, for a politician to actually marry the person they are involved with? no one will sit next to him at the next big governors party...you watch.
posted by th3ph17 at 9:24 PM on January 29, 2002

Who's Barry Bostwick?
I don't think any sort of policy should put in place. Let the voters decide in the next election if it's appropriate for him to leave his wife and marry someone much younger.
posted by gyc at 9:32 PM on January 29, 2002

I think policy is pointless, good call gyc, but the fact that her wages increased over $30,000 in three years is a little alarming, especially since she was on the public payroll. (sidenote: she's pretty hot for 35; he made a wise decision)
posted by BlueTrain at 10:11 PM on January 29, 2002

oh, bluetrain...i think you're about to get slammed by the 35+ year-olds. ;)
posted by jennak at 10:16 PM on January 29, 2002

Let the voters decide in the next election if it's appropriate for him to leave his wife and marry someone much younger.

I'm pretty sure that Glendening's term-limited out of office at the end of this term. If not, he's already indicated that he's not running. In any case, all conventional wisdom says that it's his Lt. Governor's race to lose; her name: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. 'Nuff said.
posted by Dreama at 10:51 PM on January 29, 2002

her name: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. 'Nuff said.

I recall some pundits already anointing her as the next Democratic Veep nominee, even though she's only a Lieutenant Governor.
posted by gyc at 11:39 PM on January 29, 2002

gyc, if you are slyly refering to the Pepsi commerical, very funny. If not, nuts to me, I watch too much TV. The bride looks a little like Sherry Stringfield I think.
posted by EatenByAGrue at 11:40 PM on January 29, 2002

Wow, I just sobered up and took a second look at that picture...not hot.
posted by BlueTrain at 11:56 PM on January 29, 2002

No biggie. Wish 'em luck.
posted by SpecialK at 2:20 AM on January 30, 2002

Geography is by far the largest predictor of who you will befriend, date, and marry, and something like half of all marriages come from the workplace.

What else WOULD you expect?

--Dan
posted by effugas at 2:33 AM on January 30, 2002

This is pretty darn insignificant.
posted by bingo at 4:32 AM on January 30, 2002

every company i've ever worked for has had policies barring a supervisor from dating a subordinate, especially when that supervisor has influence or control over the subordinate's salary.
posted by tolkhan at 5:42 AM on January 30, 2002

Glendening was divorced from his second wife, Frances Ann Glendening, on Nov. 19, two days before what would have been their 25th wedding anniversary. She declined to comment yesterday. The Glendenings had been a very close political couple, and Frances Ann had been among his closest advisers.

An all-too-common pattern in political life: an older, powerful man dumps his longtime, middle-aged wife for a much-younger, ambitious woman.
posted by Carol Anne at 5:46 AM on January 30, 2002

From Lori, who wanted to participate, but still hasn't been able to sign up for membership:

"I can't say that I think it should be officially banned, but I feel it hurts women when someone is apparently getting ahead because of a relationship. She can be the most talented woman in the world, but people will think of her as that blonde who was sleeping her way to the top."
posted by jennak at 6:54 AM on January 30, 2002

The photo isn't coming up on WaPo for me, so here's the BaSu ... uh, Baltimore Sun story, with a picture you can enlarge. I think she's attractive enough.

It seems draconian to ban all dating relationships, but even though favoritism should always be avoided, it's ever-present. I have buddies who would always favor me in a promotion or plum-assignment situation, and I haven't dated or slept with any of them. Shudder. Then there's the issue of affairs or closeted gay relationships, which may be concealed for reasons going beyond the business environment. Those can't be policed at all.

The end result is that the punishment falls most severely on those who are most honest and upfront about their status, which doesn't seem fair or the kind of incentive we should be encouraging.
posted by dhartung at 7:11 AM on January 30, 2002

gee whiz, bingo, i would imagine that an event like this would be quite significant to a filmic storyteller like yourself.

i know, i know.
posted by mlang at 8:28 AM on January 30, 2002

Many good, healthy relationships start at work. Do you want to put the Pointy-Haired Boss in charge of your love life?

Ash.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 6:03 AM on February 1, 2002